On June 9, 2011, President Obama signed his 86th Executive Order, and almost nobody noticed.

(For the record, Obama is on par to match President Bush’s 291 orders executed during his two terms in office. The National Archives defines an Executive Order this way; Executive orders are official documents, numbered consecutively, through which the President of the United States manages the operations of the Federal Government.)

President Obama’s E.O. 13575 is designed to begin taking control over almost all aspects of the lives of 16% of the American people. Why didn’t we notice it? Weinergate. In the middle of the Anthony Weiner scandal, as the press and most of the American people were distracted, President Obama created something called “The White House Rural Council” (WHRC).

Section One of 13575 states the following:

Section 1. Policy. Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties. Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead. These communities supply our food, fiber, and energy, safeguard our natural resources, and are essential in the development of science and innovation. Though rural communities face numerous challenges, they also present enormous economic potential. The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands.

Warning bells should have been sounding all across rural America when the phrase “sustainable rural communities” came up. As we know from researching the UN plan for Sustainable Development known as Agenda 21, these are code words for the true fundamental transformation America.

The third sentence also makes it quite clear that the government intends to take greater control over “food, fiber, and energy.”

The last sentence in Section 1 further clarifies the intent of the order by tying together “access to the capital necessary for economic growth, health care and education.”

The new White House Rural Council will probably be populated by experts in the various fields that might prove helpful to the folks who live and work outside of large urban areas, right? Well, Tom Vilsack, the current Secretary of Agriculture, will chair the group, but let us review the list of members appointed to serve on this new council – according to the order, the heads of the following groups have been appointed:

(1) the Department of the Treasury; Timothy Geithner (2) the Department of Defense; Robert Gates (3) the Department of Justice; Eric Holder (4) the Department of the Interior; Ken Salazar (5) the Department of Commerce; Gary Locke (6) the Department of Labor; Hilda Solis (7) the Department of Health and Human Services; Kathleen Sebelius ( the Department of Housing and Urban Development; Shaun Donovan (9) the Department of Transportation; Ray LaHood (10) the Department of Energy; Dr. Steven Chu (11) the Department of Education; Arne Duncan (12) the Department of Veterans Affairs; Eric Shinseki (13) the Department of Homeland Security; Janet Napolitano (14) the Environmental Protection Agency; Lisa Jackson (15) the Federal Communications Commission; Michael Copps (16) the Office of Management and Budget; Peter Orszag (17) the Office of Science and Technology Policy; John Holdren (18) the Office of National Drug Control Policy; R. Gil Kerlikowske (19) the Council of Economic Advisers; Austan Goolsbee (20) the Domestic Policy Council; Melody Barnes (former VP at Center for American Progress) (21) the National Economic Council; Gene B. Sperling (22) the Small Business Administration; Karen Mills (23) the Council on Environmental Quality; Nancy Sutley (24) the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs; Valerie Jarrett (25) the White House Office of Cabinet Affairs; and such other executive branch departments, agencies, and offices as the President or Secretary of Agriculture may, from time to time, designate. Chris Lu (or virtually anyone to be designated by the 24 people named above)

It appears that not a single department in the federal government was excluded from the new White House Rural Council, and the wild card option in number 25 gives the president and the agriculture secretary the option to designate anyone to serve on this powerful council.

Within the twenty-five designated members of the council are some curious ties to Agenda 21 and the structure being built to implement it:

Valerie Jarrett from the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs served on the board of something called Local Initiatives Support Corportation (LISC). LISC uses the language of Agenda 21 and ICLEI as their web page details their work to build “Sustainable Communities.”

Melody Barnes head of the Domestic Policy Council – Former VP at George Soros-funded Center for American Progress.

Hilda Solis from the Labor Dept – in 2000 received an award for her work on “Environmental Justice.”

Nancy Sutley head of the White House Council on Environmental Quality – Served on the board of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Water District and was one of the biggest supporters of low-flow toilets that are now credited with costing more money than expected while causing some nasty problems.

Is it possible that concerns about 13575 are just typical anti-government paranoia? Let us review the mission and function of WHRC:

Sec. 4. Mission and Function of the Council. The Council shall work across executive departments, agencies, and offices to coordinate development of policy recommendations to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in rural America, and shall coordinate my Administration’s engagement with rural communities.

“Economic prosperity” and a better “quality of life,” that all sounds fairly innocent and well-intentioned. But continuing deeper into the order we find the council is charged with four directives:

(a) make recommendations to the President, through the Director of the Domestic Policy Council and the Director of the National Economic Council, on streamlining and leveraging Federal investments in rural areas, where appropriate, to increase the impact of Federal dollars and create economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America;

The vague language here sounds non-threatening. But, is there a hint here that a “rural stimulus plan” might be in the making? Will the Federal government start pumping money into farmlands under the guise of creating “economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America?” It is difficult to discern as the language is so broad.

We continue with the functions of the WHRC:

(b) coordinate and increase the effectiveness of Federal engagement with rural stakeholders, including agricultural organizations, small businesses, education and training institutions, health-care providers, telecommunications services providers, research and land grant institutions, law enforcement, State, local, and tribal governments, and nongovernmental organizations regarding the needs of rural America;

Virtually every aspect of rural life seems to now be part of the government’s mission. And while all of the items in (b) sound like typical government speak, you should be alarmed when you read the words “nongovernmental organizations” (NGOs). NGOs are unelected, but typically government-funded groups that act like embedded community organizers. And NGOs are key to Agenda 21′s plans.

Continuing:

(c) coordinate Federal efforts directed toward the growth and development of geographic regions that encompass both urban and rural areas;

That one sounds very similar to the language found in the United Nations plan for sustainable cities known as Agenda 21. Managing the population in both rural and urban areas, with a focus on controlling “open spaces.”

This function of Executive Order 13575 ties energy development with outdoor recreation and “other conservation related activities.” When did outdoor recreation become a conservation related activity?

Aside from the content of this order and some its vague intentions, the timing of the signing should also be considered. Later this month, Washington DC is hosting a meeting of the Agenda 21 operatives who are members of ICLEI:

Washington, D.C. – ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA (ICLEI USA) and U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) today announced the launch of the National Press Club Leadership Speaker Series to be held on June 28. The event’s inaugural keynote speaker will be the Honorable Sha Zukang, Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), whose keynote address, The Road to Rio+20, will explain the role of key global and national stakeholders, and the impact and vision of this historic conference.

As Secretary-General of Rio+20, Ambassador Sha Zukang will convene high-ranking leaders from government, the private sector and civil society to chart a pathway to accelerate the implementation of sustainable development decisions and the green economy through the creation of an institutional framework and inclusive participation.

The United Nations has pushed their sustainable development program for almost twenty years. The UN’s “social justice” blueprint called Agenda 21 requires governments to control almost all aspects of an individual’s life, but has recently met with substantial resistance in America. Since The Blaze covered this topic and the story appeared on Glenn Beck’s Fox TV program, we have been inundated with reports from around the country about efforts to remove ICLEI and Agenda 21 from local governments.

Carroll County, Maryland: Starting in February, 2011, all five newly elected county commissioners, led by Richard Rothschild, voted to become the first county in the nation to end the ICLEI contract.

Amador County, California: The Mother Lode Tea Party lead the successful effort to remove ICLEI form Amador County.

Montgomery County, Pennsylvania: Activists Ruth Miller and Maggie Roddin have raised awareness that lead to the removal of ICLEI.

Edmond, Oklahoma: Molly Jenkins motivated 200 people to attend the city council meeting and demand action against ICLEI.

Las Cruces, New Mexico: continues to debate the issue, but rational voices are gaining momentum in the community.

Spartanburg, South Carolina: City Councilman Roger Nutt successfully directed the effort against the program and Spartanburg became the 6th community to kick out ICLEI in a vote of 6-0 by City Council (with one abstention).

There have also been anti-ICLEI rallies held in several cities this week, with more planned in the near future:

There appears to be a developing, grass-roots movement to reject programs like Agenda 21. It remains to be seen if these groups might also reject a Washington-based control over rural lands, like the council created by Executive Order 13575.

Barack Obama has issued a brand new executive order that establishes a White House Rural Council. This Rural Council has been given the task of developing "public-private partnerships" that will seek to bring the "economic prosperity" of our big cities to rural America. In other words, the U.S. government and the big corporations are going to team up to dominate the economies of our small towns and rural communities just like they dominate the economies of all of our big cities. So should those that live in rural America be excited about this? After all, the U.S. government and the big corporations have done such a great job of bringing "economic prosperity" to places like Detroit, Michigan and Camden, New Jersey. Won't it be great to have the federal government come in and tell rural communities how they should be doing things?

The chair of the White House Rural Council will be Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. Vilsack is a former governor of Iowa and a Democrat. Swing states like Iowa will be key in 2012, and so perhaps Obama is trying to show that he really cares for middle America.

But it is really hard to forget the remarks that Obama made about rural Americans during the 2008 campaign.

In particular, the following quote about the "bitterness" of those living in rural America got a lot of attention at the time....

"And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

Look, the vast majority of the people who live in rural America do not want to hear that they need to let go of their guns or their religion.

And most of them certainly do not want the federal government to come in and tell them how to run their local economies.

But according to Obama, the U.S. government "has an important role to play" in managing the economies of rural communities. The following is a direct quote from the executive order establishing the White House Rural Council....

Though rural communities face numerous challenges, they also present enormous economic potential. The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands.

To many Americans, all of this will sound really great. The federal government is going to come in and help the "backwoods folk" catch up with the rest of us. What could be wrong with that?

Well, the truth is that whenever the federal government gets its fingers into something it tends to really mess it up. Many of the biggest problems our country is facing today can be traced directly back to Washington D.C.

Many small towns and rural communities are doing just fine without the interference of the federal government. In fact, large numbers of Americans have purposely moved out to rural areas because they don't want the interference of the federal government in their lives.

But according to this new executive order, the Obama administration plans to stick its itchy little fingers into just about every aspect of rural life. One of the stated goals of the White House Rural Council is to do the following....

coordinate and increase the effectiveness of Federal engagement with rural stakeholders, including agricultural organizations, small businesses, education and training institutions, health-care providers, telecommunications services providers, research and land grant institutions, law enforcement, State, local, and tribal governments, and nongovernmental organizations regarding the needs of rural America

This is yet another example of how we are rapidly becoming a centrally-planned economy.

Today, there are way too many Americans that expect the federal government to solve all their problems and take care of them from birth to death.

But that is not what our founding fathers intended, and our federal government has become so corrupt and so incompetent that it could not do those things even if we wanted it to.

On June 9, 2011, an Executive Order established the White House Rural Council with 25 executive branch departments including Defense, Justice, Homeland Security, National Drug Control, Environmental Quality, Labor, Commerce, Interior, EPA, Housing, Health, Education to name just a few.

The order covers 16% of the American population who lives in rural counties because they “supply our food, fiber, and energy, safeguard our natural resources, and are essential in the development of science and innovation.”

“Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential in winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead.” What kind of future are we supposed to win? Are we losers right now? This is very vague, what years ahead?

“To enhance the Federal Government’s efforts to address the needs of rural America, this order establishes a council to better coordinate Federal programs and maximize the impact of Federal investment to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in our rural communities.” As a world traveler, I can attest that Americans already have the highest standard of living in rural areas, prosperity, and excellent quality of life when compared to anybody else.

A recent article in Washington Post appeared with the innocuous title, “What we need: Smarter growth plans.” The author is Roger K. Lewis, a practicing architect and professor emeritus at the University of Maryland. Who can possibly object to “smarter growth plans?” Except that “smart growth plans” is the euphemism used by the United Nations for its Agenda 21, a direct assault on private property rights and American sovereignty.

Roger K. Lewis suggests that “smart growth” was designed by market forces driven by “green building.” He makes no mention of Agenda 21 and ICLEI objectives and intrusion into our society since the early 1970s or the agreement signed in 1992 that went under the radar of the American people’s understanding of the complex negative ramifications for our economy and our liberties.

I have not met Americans who think, “sprawl-producing planning, zoning and mortgage templates are obsolete” as the author claims. Would Americans willingly give up their land and homes with or without compensation in exchange for a move to a densely populated high-rise, with no parking garages, no access to cars, like rats fenced in a grey concrete maze?

Communist “social engineering” confiscated land and homes for agriculture. People were forced to move into many-storied, tiny cinder block apartments without any compensation for the land or homes bulldozed. They were forced to commute by bicycles or public transit.

Lewis deems subdivision developments with low-density, detached, single-family homes as outdated. He calls the areas educationally dysfunctional and unsafe. American suburbia was built, he says, on four assumptions that have lost validity today:

Unlimited supply of land Inexpensive and inexhaustible supply of oil Homogenous land use The American dream to own and inhabit a mortgaged house.

I am not sure on what research Lewis based his conclusions, but we have huge domestic oil reserves if permits were issued to drill. We also have a vast land mass. Some areas have 70 or less inhabitants per square mile. Americans still want to own their own home and want to live in a homogeneous community of other homeowners. Just because power hungry bureaucrats at the United Nations have decided to “preserve” land and the environment for the future of the planet and its animals, neglecting the future of humans, does not mean Americans agree to this vision.

“Much of America’s land cannot and should not be developed.” Who are you to decide for us, Mr. Lewis and why? Last time I checked we were free people who determined their own life choices.

“Dependency on oil and limitless use of cars pose daunting environmental, economic, and geopolitical problems.” Who is going to decide the limit to our car use? Is it going to be done by law, more regulations, or executive order?

A handful of environmentalists, the EPA, and the United Nation’s dictators, using faulty debunked data from the University of East Anglia or phony research are trying to separate Americans from their land use, cars, trucks, and the open-wide roads.

Lewis continues his Agenda 21 fallacy. “The traditional nuclear family—mom, dad, two to three kids and one or two pets—is now a minority of America’s households.” I am positive that this man is not describing America that I know and see every day. His statements continue, “Today a majority of households are people, young or old, living alone; couples or sets of unrelated individuals of various ethnicities, ages and tastes.”

Agenda 21 and Mr. Lewis suggest building high-rises in “designated areas within municipalities where new development and re-development is feasible and desirable.” Affordable housing is a priority and so are environmental standards.

It is obvious that “smart growth plans” or Agenda 21 designed by United Nations will affect our future choices in how we live and where. EPA will be involved and will twist the arms of those who do not adopt “smart growth plans,” denying grants to states and cities and levying other penalties. By the time Americans realize the implications of Agenda 21“smart growth,” they will lose their homes and lands with no compensation. At least people who lost property under Eminent Domain have been compensated.

The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) is a conglomerate of 600 national, regional, and local government associations who promote “sustainable development” and protection of the environment because of man-made global warming that does not exist.

“Sustainable development” is the United Nations effort to contain and limit economic development in developed countries and thus control population growth. It is “sustainable de-growth,” plain and simple. The focus is “low-income agriculture” and to set limits on the developed world.

United Nations and its affiliates believe that first world countries polluted significantly during their development while urging third world countries to reduce pollution thus impeding their growth. Implementation of “sustainable development” would revert our society to a pre-modern lifestyle.

ICLEI wants to keep the environment as pristine as possible through “ideal-seeking behavior.” These euphemisms are not clearly defined in terms of what or who will evaluate or set the standards for this “ideal-seeking behavior.”

Agenda 21 sets up the global infrastructure to manage, count, and control assets. It is not concerned with protecting the environment or the world’s resources. Agenda 21 wants change from old sector-centered ways of doing business to new approaches. The “desired future state” should be to pursue “economic prosperity, environmental quality, and social equity.”

“Social equity” is the new euphemism for “social justice” the Marxists in our government have been using a lot lately. Who gave them the authority and the mandate to initiate such change? I do not remember the American people being asked through a referendum whether we wanted our way of life to be fundamentally changed according to mandates set up by the United Nations. How will population growth control be achieved in order to protect the precious environment?

In 2001 UNESCO, in The Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, stated that cultural diversity is as important as biodiversity in the sense of a more satisfactory, intellectual, emotional, moral, and spiritual existence. Who is to decide the level and quality of the population’s satisfaction, intellectual, emotional, moral, and spiritual existence? Human needs must be met while preserving the environment for the future. Again, who will decide what our needs are in order to preserve the future?

In February 2011 in Nairobi, Kenya, ICLEI attended a United Nations conference as representative of the interests of local governments. “In collaboration with partners such as UN-Habitat, Cities Alliance and ICLEI, UNEP (United Nations Environmental Protection) is working to make cities more livable, better prepared for the multiple environmental challenges they are facing, as well as giving them a stronger voice in the international climate negotiations.” Last time I checked, global warming has been debunked as a hoax and UN rapidly changed its name to climate change, continuing the attempt to fleece developed countries. In addition, who decides these international climate negotiations and why? What are we negotiating? Carbon credits?

In October 2009 in Bangkok, ICLEI stated, “local governments are offering national governments our partnership in the fight against climate change.” ICLEI wants local governments to collaborate with national governments to fight against climate change, the very change that has been scientifically debunked.

Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution states clearly, “No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation, ...No State shall,... enter into an Agreement or Compact with another State or with a foreign power…” The counties and cities that are members of ICLEI in the U.S. through its national organization are attempting to implement foreign policy, which our Constitution forbids. What mayors and municipal governments are doing is plain unconstitutional.

“Mayors and local governments set forth the following commitments to implement sub-national, national, and international frameworks by providing resources, authority, and mandate to carry forward climate protection roles and responsibilities.”

There is no law or act of Congress to authorize the aiding and abetting of foreign policy globalism by state and local governments. We have to protect our sovereignty by banning cities and counties to be members of ICLEI, an organization that promotes United Nation’s Agenda 21/“smart growth” which is detrimental to American economic interests, liberty, and sovereignty.

Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh

Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh Most recent columns

“Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh is a freelance writer (Canada Free Press, Modern Conservative, Anystreet.org, Romanian Conservative, Lucianne) and speaker who recently published a book about her 20-year experience with communist life, “Echoes of Communism,” available at Amazon in paperback and Kindle. Short essays describe health care, education, poverty, social engineering, and confiscation of property, among other subjects.

President legislates from the Oval Office and signs Executive Order to ensure Rural America will participate in Agenda 21 goals. Globalization and its implementation arm - ICLEI getting a Partner to reach into Rural America.

SUMMARY OF THIS EXECUTIVE ORDER:

1. Federal Control of Rural American Resources (Food, Health, Energy, Education/Schools, Property, Water and Lives).

7. No definitions of what “Rural America” is. Matter of fact, no definitions at all.

8. More Lawmaking through Regulation (State and Local levels)

9. More State/County Control over your city/town due to grant money distribution10. Less Local participation due to Regionalization11. More Federal Jobs funded at Tax Payer Expense12. Rights Issues: Your Voice. You can not “Un-elect” appointed committee members. You can not contact your elected representative on an issue because this is legislation through committee regulation. (Strings attached to all that tax payer funded grant money)

First of all I want you to read the opening paragraph: See the word “sustainable”? Replace it with the word “ACCEPTABLE”. That is what sustainable means. This Executive Order is all about the Feds telling rural America what is acceptable to THEM. It is no longer a local choice, or locally controlled. The Feds, several states, counties, and local governments have already fallen into the ICLEI (http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id=global-themes ) trap and have begun to implement parts of Agenda 21 through their governments. With this Executive Order, the Feds have moved to escalate their implementation in Rural America.

Ask yourself why do we need a rural program that proposes: “The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands”? We just passed universal health care, and I do not know of any community that does not have educational facilities for all of its residents. How do you think the Feds foster economic growth under this plan? (Jobs, deficits, spending, economic decline – not revenue – is the problem.)

Just how will the Feds control the local government? Through grants. Yes -money. Your tax dollars. The feds will set aside money for rural communities, administered by the state, to institute grant (free money) programs that local communities gladly participate in. Local governments will look at this grant money as a way to supplement its dwindling budgets, and without question will agree to Federal requirements. Not only is this the process that has over-burdened states and local budgets for years – this is the process that has moved the federal agenda into every community in America.

This Executive Order gives control over our local planning and development to a Federal committee. We will no longer be able to voice our concerns, opinions, or grievances at the local level. This Executive Order virtually eliminates local government’s ability to set policies that benefit rural areas without approval from the Feds.

Why an APPOINTED committee to “coordinate” this effort? Committee members will be made by appointment of agencies, offices, and departments. This Executive Order sets up another committee to regulate all aspects of rural life. Residents and local governments will have no opportunity to redress any grievances as these appointees are not elected.

Why is the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) involved so the Federal government can promote economic prosperity and quality of life in rural America? The majority of agencies listed in this Executive Order are already under DHS, and Janet Napolitano will sit on the council.

“The Department of Agriculture shall provide funding and administrative support for the Council to the extent permitted by law and within existing appropriations”. So the funds are set aside. Right. We are broke yet we have money sitting ready for yet another expansion of the Federal government. With DHS oversight and the DHS unlimited budget - yes unlimited, I am sure the Feds have plenty of money to move this agenda right into rural America. (The Department of Homeland Security has no oversight as they directly report to the President, and the perk is that DHS can demand more funds from Congress as part of their written budget through fiscal year 2012 - not ask – but demand) Remember – no matter what YOU, the taxpayer will foot the bill for this expansion of government.

“The Council shall coordinate its policy development through the Domestic Policy Council and the National Economic Council”. WHY do we need yet another council to cover a specific 16% of the country? Because Rural America still has some degree of control over resources, and we are resistant to globalization. This Executive Order allows the federal government to implement Agenda 21 right in the heart of America’s food basket. This ultimately could bring the end to rural life as we know it. By asking for the Agricultural departments to participate, they will mitigate resistance. Yes, control the food and you control the population. Think about this and research how well it worked out for California.

This Executive Order will coordinate Federal efforts directed toward the growth and development of geographic regions that encompass both urban and rural areas; and “identify and facilitate rural economic opportunities associated with energy development, outdoor recreation, and other conservation related activities”. Geographic regions – i.e. Target Areas. Just like FEMA or states (http://ppjg.wordpress.com/2010/10/25/regionalism-death-of-the-american-system-of-government/ ) completely regionalized. This Executive Order sets up regions and removes the barrier to ICLEI’s town-by-town focus and stream lines the effort to implement Agenda 21.

Finally: “This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations”. Remember there are no laws that restrict the Department of Homeland Security – thus, unlimited power over Rural America.

SUMMARY:

Under pretenses that are false (based on past statements, actions and performance), the Federal Government is attacking the United States using Agenda 21, ICLEI tactics but it is much more direct this time. The actions are simple and the results - measured but disastrous.

Ask yourself how the Federal Government’s agenda gets into our schools – into the thoughts of our children? The States offer grants or loans to schools. The State then promotes to or seeks out interested School Districts to apply. The same rules apply here. Every dollar has federal strings attached. The very same way this Executive Order will ensure rural America’s compliance and put our food supply in absolute danger through the Rural Council.

The government has the Rural Council to help "stimulate" the rural economy. The Feds just want to help, right? Their initial target audience will be agricultural organizations, Why? Say you are a farmer and a Federal Government representative knocks on your door asking you to apply for a loan or grant - just to help you out - would you think they would get very far? But if the [trusted cattle or growers' association, your neighbor] promoted it then you might be a lot more interested and believe everything to be on the up and up, right?

There is no doubt at all that Rural America in general is hurting right now; farmers are stretched and some have already had to suck in their pride to take one form of government assistance or another just to feed their families in this declining economy. When the government starts throwing this money out there with the support of trusted agricultural organizations the temptation to apply will be huge. But if the "help" is accepted the risk of losing is even greater.

The government never wants to give you something for nothing and while they speak out one side of their mouth telling you that this is to boost the dying economy, to help the rural communities and push forward on energy solutions... there will remain the high risk of default on loans and loopholes that farmers or businesses will have to jump through to receive grants. The red tape has "control" written all over it; it may even dictate what can or must be grown on a property just in order to be eligible to apply, whether accepted or not. In the short term, it may sound great but in the long term it will bankrupt farms and businesses, discredit once-trusted organizations and break the hearts and pride of generations of Rural Americans while at the same time limiting Americans who depend on our rural breadbaskets for food and further destroy the American Dollar.

I just want to remind everyone that Government money does not come from thin air; it comes from you and me, the American taxpayers. Every time the Feds hand out grants or loans we are footing the bill. The dollar is in free-fall, our economy is in the toilet, and we barrow 41 cents of every dollar. Just ask yourself, can we afford another Federal program?

Some say a one world government would be a good thing while others shy away but otherwise do nothing to stop it. Most Americans that do know there is more than a strong potential for a New World Order don't think it would be so bad assuming that the world would be governed by a document like the United States Constitution. But it has been proven by performance that Globalization will not be ruled by anything close to the rule of law.

The freedoms that have been known by older generations will not be shared by the new. The destruction of the United States Constitution is all but complete. We no longer have a 2 party system... we have the party of "d" AND "r" as one. We no longer have 3 branches of effective government... we have runaway presidents (plural), a legislative branch that either works against the people, puts on a show (generally right before an election cycle) or is bypassed altogether by executive order, presidential directorate or backdoor regulation (mainly through DHS agencies) AND lifetime justices who have done and will continue to do nothing about it. There is no 10th Amendment or 4th Amendment. The Patriot ACT supersedes the Constitution and the majority of your rights and freedoms are mere illusions that the government GRANTS you in order to keep you passive while they keep chipping away at the last bits of our foundation of freedom. There is no doubt that we are sitting on a time bomb.

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America and in order to enhance Federal engagement with rural communities, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy.

Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties. Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead. These communities supply our food, fiber, and energy, safeguard our natural resources, and are essential in the development of science and innovation. Though rural communities face numerous challenges, they also present enormous economic potential. The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands.

To enhance the Federal Government's efforts to address the needs of rural America, this order establishes a council to better coordinate Federal programs and maximize the impact of Federal investment to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in our rural communities.

Sec. 2. Establishment.

There is established a White House Rural Council (Council).

Sec. 3. Membership.

(a) The Secretary of Agriculture shall serve as the Chair of the Council, which shall also include the heads of the following executive branch departments, agencies, and offices:

(1) the Department of the Treasury;

(2) the Department of Defense;

(3) the Department of Justice;

(4) the Department of the Interior;

(5) the Department of Commerce;

(6) the Department of Labor;

(7) the Department of Health and Human Services;

( the Department of Housing and Urban Development;

(9) the Department of Transportation;

(10) the Department of Energy;

(11) the Department of Education;

(12) the Department of Veterans Affairs;

(13) the Department of Homeland Security;

(14) the Environmental Protection Agency;

(15) the Federal Communications Commission;

(16) the Office of Management and Budget;

(17) the Office of Science and Technology Policy;

(18) the Office of National Drug Control Policy;

(19) the Council of Economic Advisers;

(20) the Domestic Policy Council;

(21) the National Economic Council;

(22) the Small Business Administration;

(23) the Council on Environmental Quality;

(24) the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs;

(25) the White House Office of Cabinet Affairs; and such other executive branch departments, agencies, and offices as the President or the Secretary of Agriculture may, from time to time, designate.

(b) A member of the Council may designate, to perform the Council functions of the member, a senior-level official who is part of the member's department, agency, or office, and who is a full-time officer or employee of the Federal Government.

(c) The Department of Agriculture shall provide funding and administrative support for the Council to the extent permitted by law and within existing appropriations.

(d) The Council shall coordinate its policy development through the Domestic Policy Council and the National Economic Council.

Sec. 4. Mission and Function of the Council.

The Council shall work across executive departments, agencies, and offices to coordinate development of policy recommendations to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in rural America, and shall coordinate my Administration's engagement with rural communities. The Council shall:

(a) make recommendations to the President, through the Director of the Domestic Policy Council and the Director of the National Economic Council, on streamlining and leveraging Federal investments in rural areas, where appropriate, to increase the impact of Federal dollars and create economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America;

(b) coordinate and increase the effectiveness of Federal engagement with rural stakeholders, including agricultural organizations, small businesses, education and training institutions, health-care providers, telecommunications services providers, research and land grant institutions, law enforcement, State, local, and tribal governments, and nongovernmental organizations regarding the needs of rural America;

(c) coordinate Federal efforts directed toward the growth and development of geographic regions that encompass both urban and rural areas; and

(a) The heads of executive departments and agencies shall assist and provide information to the Council, consistent with applicable law, as may be necessary to carry out the functions of the Council. Each executive department and agency shall bear its own expense for participating in the Council.

(b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(c) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(d) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,

June 9, 2011.

Logged

“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it's an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” – Patrick Henry

(d) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

Anyone notice the words "or against any individual state's sovereignty" is absent from that clause? Good thing that it hardly matters because the 9th and 10th amendment are much more powerful than a Kissinger puppet's fraudulent edicts of tyranny written in secret during self inflicted media-paloozas.

Logged

All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Yeah Obama only has a year and a half to get the NWO agenda pushed through.

The problem is that more and more people keep waking up at a near exponential rate.

True to an extent, but the problem is that it appears to be only a partial awakening, because it looks as though most people are still buying into the fantasy that we can some how get out of the socioeconomic mess we're currently in by voting yet again for one or the other of the two corporate-owned major parties that got us into it to begin with.

Funny you mention it the Eagle is the symbol of the Constitution Party.

I of course encourage everyone to vote for their 3rd party or independent candidate of choice, but merely because it's the right thing to do, not because that in itself has any chance of effecting meaningful change within our lifetimes. Our so-called "election" system is simply too rigged against such candidates, particularly at the federal level.

Indeed--You can always rest assured when the Government implements a program using words like; "Patriot Act," "Healthcare Reform," Free Trade," you know what it truly means encroachments on liberty.

Donnay, look at the comments section at this link below--over 500 have responded and let me tell you, they are mostly farmers and ranchers and they are ANGRY that Obama has done this. They are happy the way things have been going and resent government intrusion. People are waking up!!!!

Donnay, look at the comments section at this link below--over 500 have responded and let me tell you, they are mostly farmers and ranchers and they are ANGRY that Obama has done this. They are happy the way things have been going and resent government intrusion. People are waking up!!!!

Yes I see, that is encouraging!! Most think we should send the UN packing, I couldn't agree more!

I am a farmer, and I am mad as hell and I truly think this will be the line in the sand for me.

Here is another ever increasingly line for me, in my own home state, everyone should support The Institute for Justice!

Live Free or Die?New Hampshire Homeowners Forced to Open Doors to Inspectors Or Suffer Consequences

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”—Fourth Amendment U.S. Constitution

Introduction

Residents of the Granite State are finding themselves caught between a rock and a hard place when it comes to exercising their constitutional rights to exclude unwelcome government employees.

A New Hampshire statute allows local officials to obtain a warrant to enter and search a person's home if he refuses to allow a government-hired inspector to conduct an interior inspection for the purpose of property assessment. If the officials would rather not take the time to get a warrant, they don't have to. That is because the statute allows the government to punish the homeowner for refusing to allow a warrantless and unconstitutional search of his home by terminating his right to appeal his property-tax assessment.[1] In short, the statute puts homeowners in an intolerable position: no matter what they do, government employees can either force their way into their homes or punish them if they refuse to "consent" to a search by an inspector. Even the mere act of asking the inspector to get a warrant can get them in trouble.

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prevents government officials from forcing themselves into citizens' homes. That protection is important because, as the U.S. Supreme Court has stated, "the sanctity of the home . . . has been embedded in our traditions since the founding of the Republic."[2] But New Hampshire's property-assessment inspection law has cast aside the Fourth Amendment rights of its citizens. For that reason, the Institute for Justice joined with four New Hampshire residents on August 25, 2004, to challenge it in federal district court. The goal of the lawsuit is to restore the protections provided by the Fourth Amendment to all New Hampshire homeowners.

An Unconstitutional Statute in Action: Casting Aside the Fourth Amendment

Phil Smith and Tony Stanizzi are homeowners in Hollis, N.H. They and their families love their community and, like most Americans, they take it for granted that the government cannot force its way into the homes of law-abiding citizens.

For that reason, they were shocked when Town officials began a process of mandatory interior inspections for every home in Hollis. Inspectors from a private appraisal company hired by the Town began canvassing their neighborhood and trying to search the inside of their homes, as well as the homes of their neighbors. Like many other towns in the state, Hollis was revaluing all the homes of its residents, and had commissioned a private appraisal company to conduct interior inspections. Phil and Tony were perfectly willing to cooperate with the company's inspectors by answering any questions they had about their homes and discussing public records about their homes. Both of them allowed the inspectors to walk around the outside of their homes and take measurements. However, they did not want strangers searching inside their homes and invading their privacy. Even though one of the inspectors who came to Tony's home pointed out that the Town could always get a warrant if Tony refused to let him in, Tony's family, like Phil's, stood their ground. After all, the Fourth Amendment prevents government employees from forcing their way into the homes of law-abiding citizens.

Unfortunately, their refusal to consent to a search had serious consequences.

Normally, a homeowner in New Hampshire who believes his tax assessment is incorrect can apply for an abatement (a reduction in his home's assessed value) to his town's board of selectmen or its assessors.[3] If that application isn't granted, he can then apply for relief to the New Hampshire Board of Tax and Land Appeals (BTLA) or his local Superior Court.[4] But because Phil and Tony refused to allow a search, Hollis summarily denied their applications for abatement—even though they pointed out errors in the valuation of their land, not their home. And the BTLA, relying on the statute discussed above, said that it would not consider their appeal for the same reason.

Tony and Alicia Lekas live in Hudson. Next year, an inspector from an appraisal company hired by their Town will attempt to search the inside of their home. Like Phil and Tony Stanizzi, they are willing to cooperate with the local assessor's office by answering any questions it may have, discussing public records about their house, and allowing an inspector to make an exterior inspection. But they don't want a stranger walking through their home.

As Phil says, "Government employees in the Live Free or Die state shouldn't be allowed to intrude into my family's home or penalize me for merely exercising my Fourth Amendment rights."

The Fourth Amendment: Protecting the Sanctity of the Home

The Fourth Amendment firmly establishes the sanctity of the home by guaranteeing that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause." As the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held, "[P]hysical entry of the home is the chief evil against which the wording of the Fourth Amendment is directed . . . ."[5] As the Court has also noted, by protecting the home from unwarranted and arbitrary government intrusions, the Fourth Amendment "gives concrete expression to a right of the people which is basic to a free society."[6]

Although many people think that the Fourth Amendment only protects those accused of illegal activity, the Amendment guarantees one of the most fundamental aspects of American liberty and private property rights: the right to keep unwanted intruders off one's property. The Supreme Court has held that the protections of the Fourth Amendment "apply to all invasions on the part of the government and its employees of the sanctity of a man's home and the privacies of life."[7] The Court has emphasized that "even the most law-abiding citizen has a very tangible interest in limiting the circumstances under which the sanctity of his home may be broken by official authority."[8] Moreoever, "t is surely anomalous to say that the individual and his private property are fully protected by the Fourth Amendment only when the individual is suspected of criminal behavior."[9]

Generally, the Fourth Amendment requires that, in order to enter a person's property without his consent, a government official must obtain a valid search warrant issued by a judge and based on some reasonable suspicion ("probable cause") that the law is actually being violated.[10] Both these requirements—probable cause and the issuance of a warrant—serve to safeguard people from what the U.S. Supreme Court has called "arbitrary invasions by governmental officials."[11] The requirement of "probable cause" ensures that government officials cannot engage in blanket searches of the homes of law-abiding citizens.[12] The warrant requirement ensures that a neutral judge will review an official's determination that "probable cause" exists.[13] Because officials are not neutral (they are pursuing the government's interests and may see "probable cause" where it does not exist), the Supreme Court has emphasized that generally, searches conducted without a warrant are presumed unconstitutional.[14]

I can't recall a President that has BEWITCHED a nation THIS much. No, I'm not talking about his own "Democrats", it seems like "Republicans" have grown pretty apathetic as well.(ie-remember how they got outraged at Clinton and Carter, but are barely putting up anything with Obama)

Sure, "Republicans" may say they hate him, but other than that, they just seem apathetic over what's going on in Capitol Hill.

I can't recall a President that has BEWITCHED a nation THIS much. No, I'm not talking about his own "Democrats", it seems like "Republicans" have grown pretty apathetic as well.(ie-remember how they got outraged at Clinton and Carter, but are barely putting up anything with Obama)

Sure, "Republicans" may say they hate him, but other than that, they just seem apathetic over what's going on in Capitol Hill.

Of course any anti-Obama rhetoric is going to be seen as racist by many ignorant Americans and they literally fear race riots.

Look at this....

FBI Covering For Obama; Congress Afraid To Challenge;Would Be Felony Offense And May Be Treasonous; Fear Backlash

Retired Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, the chief of Stand Up America U.S., a national security expert and a Fox News contributor, says the "Certificate of Live Birth" released in April by the White House as "proof positive" of President Obama's Hawaiian birth is a forgery, but the FBI is covering the fraud and no one in Congress is willing to tackle the situation because of fears of a "black backlash" if the failings of the nation's first black president are revealed.

In an interview today with Greg Corombos for WND, Vallely, who previously has expressed concerns about the U.S. Constitution and whether the Obama administration is in violation, said, "His actual birth certificate has never been found in Hawaii nor released from Hawaii hospital there, Kapiolani Hospital there, if it in fact did exist."

"We've had 3 CIA agents retired and some of their analytical associates look at it and all came to the same conclusion that even the long-form was a forged document," Vallely said.

"No members of Congress will take this on. The word I get out of Washington is that they don't want to challenge this because it would be in fact a felony offense and in some cases may be even treasonous and [they are] afraid of a black backlash from some of the urban areas," Vallely said.

"But that's a very poor excuse for not taking necessary steps to make sure this president in fact is a legitimate president under Article 2 and he is a born U.S. citizen."

The structures of government designed and intended to uncover wrongdoing, in this case, are on the wrong side, he said.

"I think they're [the FBI} covering for this administration. I think the corruption within this administration is so proliferated through the agencies of government now, we're just in a bad situation here. I think the lack of confidence in our government is growing and many feel that not only all the members of Congress but even our courts are corrupted at this time," he said.

The questions over Obama's eligibility to occupy the Oval Office under the requirements in the Constitution that demand that person be a "natural born citizen" have been raised since before he was elected.

It is as though they have preselected individuals that they know are corrupt to conveniently sacrifice on the altar which will then allow them to implement their evil, despotic, treasonous agenda, while the masses are totally engrossed in a scripted side-show.

The real sad part of this equation is they know the masses are so simple minded and morally corrupt that they will enjoy such a debacle instead of lamenting the fact our Elected Representatives / Servants cannot control their basic instincts and see nothing wrong with the debasement they indulge in.

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/7958-obama-signs-agenda-21-related-executive-order...The order also states that the WHRC will “coordinate and increase the effectiveness of Federal engagement with rural stakeholders, including agricultural organizations, small businesses, education and training institutions, healthcare providers, telecommunications services providers, research and land grant institutions, law enforcement, State, local, and tribal governments, and nongovernmental organizations regarding the needs of rural America.”

Logged

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

...Well, Tom Vilsack, the current Secretary of Agriculture, will chair the group, but let us review the list of members appointed to serve on this new council – according to the order, the heads of the following groups have been appointed:

(1) the Department of the Treasury; Timothy Geithner (2) the Department of Defense; Robert Gates (3) the Department of Justice; Eric Holder (4) the Department of the Interior; Ken Salazar (5) the Department of Commerce; Gary Locke (6) the Department of Labor; Hilda Solis (7) the Department of Health and Human Services; Kathleen Sebelius ( the Department of Housing and Urban Development; Shaun Donovan (9) the Department of Transportation; Ray LaHood (10) the Department of Energy; Dr. Steven Chu (11) the Department of Education; Arne Duncan (12) the Department of Veterans Affairs; Eric Shinseki (13) the Department of Homeland Security; Janet Napolitano (14) the Environmental Protection Agency; Lisa Jackson (15) the Federal Communications Commission; Michael Copps (16) the Office of Management and Budget; Peter Orszag (17) the Office of Science and Technology Policy; John Holdren (18) the Office of National Drug Control Policy; R. Gil Kerlikowske (19) the Council of Economic Advisers; Austan Goolsbee (20) the Domestic Policy Council; Melody Barnes (former VP at Center for American Progress) (21) the National Economic Council; Gene B. Sperling (22) the Small Business Administration; Karen Mills (23) the Council on Environmental Quality; Nancy Sutley (24) the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs; Valerie Jarrett (25) the White House Office of Cabinet Affairs; and such other executive branch departments, agencies, and offices as the President or Secretary of Agriculture may, from time to time, designate. Chris Lu (or virtually anyone to be designated by the 24 people named above)...Within the twenty-five designated members of the council are some curious ties to Agenda 21 and the structure being built to implement it:

Valerie Jarrett from the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs served on the board of something called Local Initiatives Support Corportation (LISC). LISC uses the language of Agenda 21 and ICLEI as their web page details their work to build “Sustainable Communities.”

Melody Barnes head of the Domestic Policy Council – Former VP at George Soros-funded Center for American Progress.

Hilda Solis from the Labor Dept – in 2000 received an award for her work on “Environmental Justice.”

Nancy Sutley head of the White House Council on Environmental Quality – Served on the board of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Water District and was one of the biggest supporters of low-flow toilets that are now credited with costing more money than expected while causing some nasty problems....As long as there’s not another Weinergate, maybe they’ll notice.

Logged

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

...Well, Tom Vilsack, the current Secretary of Agriculture, will chair the group, but let us review the list of members appointed to serve on this new council – according to the order, the heads of the following groups have been appointed:

(1) the Department of the Treasury; Timothy Geithner (2) the Department of Defense; Robert Gates (3) the Department of Justice; Eric Holder (4) the Department of the Interior; Ken Salazar (5) the Department of Commerce; Gary Locke (6) the Department of Labor; Hilda Solis (7) the Department of Health and Human Services; Kathleen Sebelius ( the Department of Housing and Urban Development; Shaun Donovan (9) the Department of Transportation; Ray LaHood (10) the Department of Energy; Dr. Steven Chu (11) the Department of Education; Arne Duncan (12) the Department of Veterans Affairs; Eric Shinseki (13) the Department of Homeland Security; Janet Napolitano (14) the Environmental Protection Agency; Lisa Jackson (15) the Federal Communications Commission; Michael Copps (16) the Office of Management and Budget; Peter Orszag (17) the Office of Science and Technology Policy; John Holdren (18) the Office of National Drug Control Policy; R. Gil Kerlikowske (19) the Council of Economic Advisers; Austan Goolsbee (20) the Domestic Policy Council; Melody Barnes (former VP at Center for American Progress) (21) the National Economic Council; Gene B. Sperling (22) the Small Business Administration; Karen Mills (23) the Council on Environmental Quality; Nancy Sutley (24) the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs; Valerie Jarrett (25) the White House Office of Cabinet Affairs; and such other executive branch departments, agencies, and offices as the President or Secretary of Agriculture may, from time to time, designate. Chris Lu (or virtually anyone to be designated by the 24 people named above)...Within the twenty-five designated members of the council are some curious ties to Agenda 21 and the structure being built to implement it:

Valerie Jarrett from the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs served on the board of something called Local Initiatives Support Corportation (LISC). LISC uses the language of Agenda 21 and ICLEI as their web page details their work to build “Sustainable Communities.”

Melody Barnes head of the Domestic Policy Council – Former VP at George Soros-funded Center for American Progress.

Hilda Solis from the Labor Dept – in 2000 received an award for her work on “Environmental Justice.”

Nancy Sutley head of the White House Council on Environmental Quality – Served on the board of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Water District and was one of the biggest supporters of low-flow toilets that are now credited with costing more money than expected while causing some nasty problems....As long as there’s not another Weinergate, maybe they’ll notice.

This is a list of some of the biggest weasels and losers in America---people who couldn't hold a regular job--Vilsack, Geithner, Gates, Locke, etc.

The government is afraid of 16% of America.

Logged

I'M A DEPLORABLE KNUCKLEHEAD THAT SUPPORTS PRESIDENT TRUMP. MAY GOD BLESS HIM AND KEEP HIM SAFE.

EVERYONE MUST REMEMBER THAT THE SHERIFFS ARE THE KING OF THEIR COUNTIES. They even trump the president.

Absolutely! We need to help wake the sheriffs up! I gave our Sheriff, Sheriff Mack's book.

America's Last Hope

Sheriff Mack's latest book covers decades of research to prove once and for all that the sheriffs in this country are indeed the ultimate law authority in their respective jurisdictions. The sheriff absolutely has the power and responsibility to defend his citizens against all enemies, including those from our own Federal Government. History, case law, common law and common sense all show clear evidence that the sheriff is the people's protector in all issues of injustice and is responsible for keeping the peace in all matters. He is the last line of defense for his constituents; he is America's last hope to regain our forgotten freedom. This short but powerful book is a must read for all citizens, sheriffs, and government officials that we may all work to return America to the constitutional republic she was meant to be. Amazing as it might be, the sheriff can make this happen!

Absolutely! We need to help wake the sheriffs up! I gave our Sheriff, Sheriff Mack's book.

Great work donnay. We need to help Sheriff Mack get this book out to every rural sheriff in America. It looks like they are very afraid of 16% of America. They want our 2nd Amendment and they want our land and everything else.

Logged

I'M A DEPLORABLE KNUCKLEHEAD THAT SUPPORTS PRESIDENT TRUMP. MAY GOD BLESS HIM AND KEEP HIM SAFE.

Globalist who wrote books advocating highly controlled society dominated by technocratic elite is now concerned about “disparity in society”Paul Joseph WatsonPrison Planet.comThursday, July 7, 2011Zbigniew Brzezinski, who forty years ago wrote of a highly controlled future society where the population would be subjugated by a technocratic elite, appeared on MSNBC’s Morning Joe yesterday to predict that middle class unrest caused by economic disenfranchisement would soon hit America.

“I don’t want to be a prophet of doom — and I don’t think we are approaching doom — but I think we’re going to slide into intensified social conflicts, social hostility, some forms of radicalism, there is just going to be a sense that this is not a just society,” Brzezinski said, adding that civil unrest would begin when the lower middle class becomes severely affected by the economic fallout and rising unemployment.The former National Security Advisor predicted “really serious international turmoil” as a result of the United States, Europe and Japan, the three traditional pillars of global economic strength, struggling with deep financial crises.CFR member Brzezinski’s so-called concern about “disparity” and a “fair society,” as the rich get richer and the middle class becomes poorer, is completely hypocritical given the fact that he wrote books four decades ago virtually advocating precisely that system, where a tiny elite ruthlessly control and dominate the rest of humanity.However, this is certainly not the first time that Brzezinski has expressed concerns that a growing rage caused by economic and social disenfranchisement could threaten the existing power structure.During a Council on Foreign Relations speech in Montreal last year, Brzezinski, a regular attendee of the elitist Bilderberg Group meeting, warned of a “global political awakening,” mainly comprising of younger people in developing states, that threatened to topple the existing international order.“For the first time in human history almost all of humanity is politically activated, politically conscious and politically interactive… The resulting global political activism is generating a surge in the quest for personal dignity, cultural respect and economic opportunity in a world painfully scarred by memories of centuries-long alien colonial or imperial domination,” Brzezinski told fellow elitists.

Logged

I'M A DEPLORABLE KNUCKLEHEAD THAT SUPPORTS PRESIDENT TRUMP. MAY GOD BLESS HIM AND KEEP HIM SAFE.

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

The Council has implemented policies that hold true to the President’s all-of-the-above approach to harnessing every domestic energy source. In 2011, the U.S. became a net exporter of ethanol and researchers have linked the increasing supply of ethanol to a drop in gasoline prices of approximately $0.25 per gallon on average. These investments provide increasing opportunities for farmers, ranchers, and forest managers to contribute to U.S. energy security and greenhouse gas mitigation goals. But we can’t stop there. As part of his “To-Do List,” the President has called on Congress to pass the production tax credit, which will play an essential role in supporting American businesses and American jobs in communities across the county, while also investing in American innovation.

The exceptional accomplishments of The White House Rural Council over the past year show the Obama Administration’s commitment to improving the lives of rural Americans. But we have more to do; we look forward to continuing the critical work of bringing more investments and support to the vital, hardworking rural communities that truly are the cornerstone of America.

Barack Obama has issued a brand new executive order that establishes a White House Rural Council. This Rural Council has been given the task of developing "public-private partnerships" that will seek to bring the "economic prosperity" of our big cities to rural America.

In other words, the U.S. government and the big corporations are going to team up to dominate the economies of our small towns and rural communities just like they dominate the economies of all of our big cities.

So should those that live in rural America be excited about this? After all, the U.S. government and the big corporations have done such a great job of bringing "economic prosperity" to places like Detroit, Michigan and Camden, New Jersey. Won't it be great to have the federal government come in and tell rural communities how they should be doing things?...

Quote

"And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

Logged

Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5